More 'Peace Talks,' Same Old War Machine
The Independent reports Moscow and Kyiv are exchanging deadly blows just days before another round of US-backed 'peace talks' in Geneva. This familiar sequence of intensified conflict preceding supposed diplomatic overtures is presented by mainstream outlets as an unfortunate coincidence, or perhaps, a desperate attempt to gain leverage. However, this dance is a well-worn choreography. Recall the
lead-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq; negotiations at the UN were dismissed even as the invasion was being meticulously planned, a stark reminder that 'diplomacy' can sometimes be simply a rhetorical cover. Similarly, in October 1973, US efforts for a ceasefire during the Yom Kippur War were aimed at preventing an Israeli collapse, not fostering equitable peace. The Piaz documented in 2023 that
even US Secretary of State Antony Blinken publicly conceded that prolonged conflict could paradoxically create 'a path to a just and lasting peace.' One might wonder why, if genuine peace is the goal, these 'talks' consistently follow, rather than precede, heightened hostilities. The pattern suggests that these diplomatic theatricals serve to legitimize pre-determined outcomes, or to apply
pressure, often with an unspoken ultimatum rather than a sincere effort to find common ground. It's a double standard where one side's aggression is condemned, while another's is implicitly endorsed as a necessary prelude to a 'negotiated' settlement. The historical record warns us: watch not what is said at the negotiating table, but what is done on the battlefield in the weeks and months prior.